|
From: | Alan West |
Subject: | Re: Unimplemented AppKit classes |
Date: | Wed, 22 Jan 2003 19:22:28 +0000 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20030120 |
Gregory Casamento wrote:
Exactly - GNUstep doesn't have to look like Nextstep because it is an implementation of Openstep.See below... --- Alan West <alan@alanz.com> wrote:I switched from using KDE to GNUstep built from cvs. With everything setup I'm now in a position to start helping out. I'd have liked to help implement the NSToolbar and NSStatusbar - but I guess its not worth it... Is it simply that the GNUstep project's aim is to copy the older NextstepGNUstep is an implementation of OpenStep, not NEXTSTEP. There is a difference.
without any improvements made in similar directions to the latest MacOS X version of Nextstep?......GNUstep absolutely does incorporate improvements from MOSX. For example, you'll notice that classes such as NSOutlineView, NSOpenGLView and others are present in GNUstep, but are not present on older OpenStep boxes. The aim is to create a framework which can be used to port both MOSX applications andolder OPENSTEP applications to GNUstep on any number of platforms. :)
Which is why I got extremely interested in the GNUstep project.
GNUstep also has a number of improvements which MOSX lacks, such as certain GNUstep specific classes which arent' in MOSX.
Cool
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |